Unstoppable Force, Meet Immovable Object

Heading into the Australian Open, I cringed at the thought of Andy Murray walking away with the title. I just don’t like him. He plays well but he just isn’t fun to watch. So you could just imagine my excitement in knowing that he was taken out by little known Fernando Verdasco, a fellow Spaniard and left-hander to Nadal.

Then he beat Tsonga too. I caught the latter half of that match and I couldn’t believe what I saw. Verdasco looked like a smarter, hardcourt-tuned Rafa Nadal complete with that booming topspin forehand, excellent mobility, and two things Rafa doesn’t have — a profound netgame and a Roddick-like serve. At his best points, he looked liked a Rafa/Roger hybrid or at least an elder Nadal (Rafa’s moves without the stress). This guy is too good to be true. When Rafa won over Gilles Simon, I was already cheering for Verdasco.

The logic behind was simple: If he lost I was still happy. Vamos Rafa!

So I really looked forward to that Friday afternoon as if nothing else in the week mattered. I was expecting nothing less than a five-set match and well, I got something more: five sets of the most awesome tennis I’ve ever seen. Even better than Wimbledon, I dare say. There is no question that the better man won, but Verdasco was never really too far behind. It all boiled down to mental toughness and I don’t think anyone would doubt Rafa’s.

I hope Fernando Verdasco continues playing like this. He’ll need more big match experience to calm those nerves but his game is way up there. I hope he breaks into the top five. I look forward to a French Open rematch. And on his way, can he dispatch Roger Federer too? I’d like to see their styles meet and you can be sure I’ll have my money on the Spaniard.

Check out this video of the craziest point in the entire game. I have never seen a standing ovation for a single point before.

Retreat into Skyscrapers

About a month ago, I caught The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The title always intrigued me but it took extreme boredom for me to finally get around to see it. It has an interesting premise. Boy meets girl, then girl loses all her memories of the boy. It’s 50 First Dates but only more twisted. Upon realizing that her memory loss is far from accidental, the guy undergoes the same procedure only to discover that it is incredibly difficult to purge his mind of all memories of her — and that he didn’t even want to. Spotless mind is literal here, and so is eternal sunshine. Hence, love is that blotch of yellow that remains in your sight even when you shut your eyes after staring too long into the sun.

My mind is far from spotless. Teaching history has had a profound effect on my spirit, and hence the past is inevitably part of the present. There are several events that I would like purged but I’ve come to stand by the belief that we fall so we learn to pick ourselves up. And yet this falls into the category of things that are easier said. I don’t always succeed, more often I don’t, and in those moments when I wish the past could just be purged, I retreat.

I retreat into skyscrapers. Any cityscape would yield images of buildings racing towards the sky. Buildings within which people race with each other to get a raise, intentionally neglecting to question their existence and convincing themselves that perhaps they’ve found meaning in the routines they do. Yet the most ominous skyscrapers are those that exist within our minds. In these places we are all CEOs, calling the shots and convincing ourselves of the myth of our own self-importance.

I notice that retreating into skyscrapers is how I deal. I work hard — too hard at times — on those things I know I can make a difference in, not bothering anymore to find those things that may make a difference in me. Because those things that change me stay forever with me, and hence there is some strange comfort in being so far up that skyscraper where no one can touch me. However, it is true what they say — it is lonely at the top. That no matter how many people you save, it will be yourself that will be most important. So I remind me to take care of me but even that, I discover, is getting more difficult to do.

For the spice of life does not happen in the boardrooms and the conference halls, but in the obscure coffee shops and public parks that punctuate different parts of the city. I realize that there are times we must go down from the highest floors and spill into the mezzanine for a quick cup of coffee with a friend we haven’t seen. Better yet we evacuate the building in haste to fly kites, ride bicycles, and lick ice cream while sitting along the curb. Even much more await outside the city — the beach, the mountain, the valley — places that I’ve reduced to generalities for I now lack the adjectives to describe their scents and sights. It has been too long, and it will be longer still.

Obama extends friendship to the Muslim world

In his first formal interview as President of the United States, Barack Obama speaks exclusively to Al-Arabiya TV and addresses a largely Arab and Muslim audience. This speaks volumes.

Read the full transcript here. My favorite part:

QUESTION: President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, “war on terror,” and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people — Islamic fascism. You’ve always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of –

THE PRESIDENT: I think that you’re making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations — whether Muslim or any other faith in the past — that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.

And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda — that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it — and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.

But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.

Bloggers pay up! Interwebs to be charged?

Hold on. Put those pitchforks down first. Thanks to Karlo for bringing this up. But let’s look into this more deeply.

There is currently a proposed memorandum (dated December 22, 2008 ) by the National Telecommunications Commission which seeks to regulate the use of telecommunications utilities and services by imposing a fee on its myriad applications. My dear friends, if we read the guidelines closely, they don’t only seek to regulate bloggers — their intent is to regulate the Internet itself.

Take a look at some excerpts.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to RA7925, Executive Order (EO) No. 546 series of 1979, and in order to encourage and facilitate the development of contents and the provision thereof to the consumers, the National Telecommunications Commission (Commission) hereby promulgates the following guidelines:

A. DEFINITIONS

1. The following terms as used in this Circular shall have the following definitions:

a. Content – refers to all types of contents delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers such as music, ring tones, logos, video clips, etc.

b. Information – refers to all types of information delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers, e.g. road traffic information, financial information, visa application information, etc.

c. Application – refers to all types of applications delivered to/accessed by the users/subscribers, e.g. mobile banking, electronic payments, point of sale service, etc.

d. Electronic Game – refers to games played online except gambling.

e. Contents Providers – are persons or entities offering and providing contents to the public for compensation through the networks, systems and/or facilities of authorized networks, systems and/or facilities providers.

f. Information Providers – are persons or entities offering and providing information to the public for compensation through the networks, systems and/or facilities of authorized networks, systems and/or facilities providers.

g. Applications Providers – are persons or entities offering and providing applications to the public for compensation through the networks, systems and/or facilities of authorized networks, systems and/or facilities providers.

h. Electronic Games Providers – are persons or entities offering and providing electronic games to the public for compensation through the networks, systems and/or facilities of authorized networks, systems and/or facilities providers.

i. Contents Developers – are persons or entities creating contents.

j. Information Sources – are persons or entities providing information to Information Providers.

k. Applications Developer – are persons or entities creating applications.

l. Electronic Games Developer – are persons or entities creating electronic games.

B REGISTRATION

1. Contents, Information, Applications and/or Electronic Games Providers, Contents Developers, Information Sources, Applications Developers, and Electronic Games Developers are required to have commercial presence in the country and shall secure Certificate of Registration (COR) from the Commission.

2. There shall be no nationality requirement for contents, information, applications and/or electronic games providers, contents, applications and/or electronic games developers and information sources.

3. The application for registration shall be filed and acted upon by the Commission not later than seven (7) working days from date of application.

4. The application shall include the following documents:

a. Valid registration from the Securities and Exchange Commission or from the Department of Trade and Industry and Articles of Incorporation;

b. Facilities lease agreement with duly enfranchised and certificated public telecommunications entity; and

5. The Certificate of Registration shall be valid for a maximum period of five (5) years. Applicants for registration may opt to apply for shorter period not shorter than one (1) year. Certificates of Registration shall be renewable.

D FEES AND CHARGES

1. The following fees and charges shall be imposed:

a. Filing Fee : PhP 300.00
b. Annual Registration Fee: 6,000.00
c. Surcharge for late : 50% of the annual registration fee if application filing of application is filed within six (6) months from date of expiry for renewal 100% if filed after six (6) months from date of expiry

Hold on. So I am now required to register myself as a commercial entity and pay the NTC a fee for blogging? Look at what it says again, now with emphasis:

Contents, Information, Applications and/or Electronic Games Providers, Contents Developers, Information Sources, Applications Developers, and Electronic Games Developers are required to have commercial presence in the country and shall secure Certificate of Registration (COR) from the Commission.

How about my students posting YouTube videos, keeping Multiply blogs, sending e-mail, submitting projects online — they have to register too? Why should we register as commercial entities if we don’t even earn from our online activities?

I understand that that sounds like a ridiculous notion. The memorandum may not say that directly, but the guidelines are so poorly worded that they will end up saying everything and meaning nothing. If I truly want to be an alarmist, we can interpret the law as not just registration fees for every blogger, but a charge for every instant message you send, credits for your first hundred e-mails, and so on.

That leads to my next criticism — implementation. How can they regulate something as amorphous as the Internet?

This proposed memorandum is pursuant of the older Republic Act 7925 or AN ACT TO PROMOTE AND GOVERN THE DEVELOPMENT OF PHILIPPINE TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND THE DELIVERY OF PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES.

It was approved and put into law March 1, 1995. A good three or four years before the Internet became so widespread in the Philippines.

Reading the Republic Act, I detect that its paradigm simply does not match the reality we have now. Its policy objectives had more to do with the creation, distribution, and facilitation of a telecommunications market in the country. Take a look.

(a) A fundamental objective of government is to develop and maintain a viable, efficient, reliable and universal telecommunication infrastructure using the best available and affordable technologies, as a vital tool to nation building and development;

(b) The expansion of the telecommunications network shall give priority to improving and extending basic services to areas not yet served. For this purpose, government shall promote a fair, efficient and responsive market to stimulate the growth and development of the telecommunications facilities and services, with emphasis on the accessibility by persons to basic services in unserved and underserved areas at affordable rates;

(c) The radio frequency spectrum is a scarce public resource that shall be administered in the public interest and in accordance with international agreements and conventions to which the Philippines is a party and granted to the best qualified. The government shall allocate the spectrum to service providers who will use it efficiently and effectively to meet public demand for telecommunications service and may avail of new and cost effective technologies in the use of methods for its utilization;

(d) Rates and tariff charges shall be fair, just and reasonable and for this purpose, the regulatory body shall develop tariff structures based on socioeconomic factors and on financial, technical and commercial criteria as measures to ensure a fair rate of return and as a tool to ensure economic and social development;

(e) Public telecommunications services shall be provided by private enterprises. The private sector shall be the engine of rapid and efficient growth in the telecommunications industry;

(f) A healthy competitive environment shall be fostered, one in which telecommunications carriers are free to make business decisions and to interact with one another in providing telecommunications services, with the end in view of encouraging their financial viability while maintaining affordable rates;

(g) A fair and reasonable interconnection of facilities of authorized public network operators and other providers of telecommunications services is necessary in order to achieve a viable, efficient, reliable and universal telecommunications services;

(h) The government shall give all the assistance and encouragement to Philippine international carriers in order to establish interconnection with other countries so as to provide access to international communications highways on a competitive basis;

(i) For efficiency, practicability, and convenience, but with due regard to the observance of due process at all times, regulation of telecommunications entities shall rely principally on an administrative process that is stable, transparent and fair, giving due emphasis to technical, legal, economic and financial considerations;

(j) No single franchise shall authorize an entity to engage in both telecommunications and broadcasting, either through the airwaves or by cable;

(k) Ownership of public telecommunications entities to as wide a number of people as possible, preferably to its customers, in order to encourage efficiency and public accountability and to tap personal savings shall be encouraged;

(l) The development of a domestic telecommunications manufacturing industry to meet the needs of the Philippines and to take advantage of export opportunities shall be promoted without preventing, deterring or hampering the goal of full universal service; and

(m) Human resources skills and capabilities must be harnessed and improved to sustain the growth and the development of telecommunications under a fast changing telecommunications environment.

In many ways, we can say that this law helped create the Internet in the Philippines. Not too long after 1995, PLDT embarked on its Zero Backlog program to install telephone lines and fibre optic cables. As far as policy goes, RA 7925 was what we needed in 1995.

It’s 2009 now. This proposed memorandum by the NTC is a poor application of RA 7925. Its proposed mechanisms do not correspond to the act’s stated policies of enhancing the delivery of telecommunication services.

There is some argument to be made for the regulation of the Internet provided that the resources are scarce, but that is hardly the case. Lines are getting faster, bandwidths are getting wider, and applications are becoming more diverse.

Moreover, now there is hardly any line between a consumer of information and a producer of information — that’s the essence of ‘Web 2.0′. The proposed memorandum relies on a 1995 paradigm where there still exists a separation between the two. It will be impossible to work with the definitions they have currently stated if ever they bring this memo to effect. Hence, imposing this as a law won’t just be impossible; it would be ridiculous.

Furthermore, the proposed guidelines apply to today’s consumers what held true to 1995′s service providers. There is a clear mismatch here for RA 7925 explicitly refers to the establishment of a utilities infrastructure while the present guidelines transcend that mandate into regulating its very use. Again, there would have been no mismatch if the realities were different. The Internet is not diminished in its use; it is enriched.

So perhaps, it is this value which they wish to capitalize on. If that’s the purpose — and increasingly it is seemingly so — then they’re going about it the wrong way. For to regulate Internet behavior across the board based on loose definitions of “content providers” has the real danger of stifling creativity across the board, and that will ultimately kill value.

My suggestion for the NTC is to look the other way — encourage the use of the Internet and provide platforms for people to develop their ideas into their own businesses. Then that you can have registered and taxed. I see that this is what they intend to do in most of the memo; I just need greater clarity in the other parts of it.

At worst, if this memo becomes law, we may see slightly more expensive games and Internet services. Otherwise, I don’t see much else. The proposed memo really isn’t worth much.

Nonetheless, it is tempting to read into this law through the perspective of Filipino realpolitik — that the NTC is just another agency through which the administration will quell opposition and dissent. This is idle speculation, but you never know. I have to make the most of this blog while it’s free (which really isn’t since we do pay for our DSL service, and I pay WordPress for my CSS and domain). Until then, I’ll have my pitchfork ready.

This is One Big Plurk

Nothing quite like getting sick to force me to slow down. Nothing deadly serious, but I’ve been under the weather since Saturday afternoon. Was supposed to go back to work this morning until I felt an overpowering headache right after I stepped out the shower. Turns out I wasn’t as well as I thought. I’ll be back tomorrow.

My sorrier state made me less patient for writing. Thank heavens for Plurk. Microblogging is asinine and fun, and hence perfect for the past days.

I also got to catch up with some movies. I like the first Ice Age more than the second. Madagascar 2 is Plurkish fun. And Slumdog Millionaire is proof that artish films are nice, but they’re not my cup of tea. I realize that I only watch movies when I want zero brainwave activity. If I need intellectual stimulation I have my books. That having been said, I haven’t read a single book in the past four days either. Or maybe why I didn’t enjoy Bombay Calling (a documentary on call centers) as much as I should have. Just shows you how far I’ve gone.

Thankfully, the past four days were made easier by the Australian Open. Just when I was going to catch some sleep in the afternoon, some matches go on screen. Nadal is looking unstoppable at the moment. I hope he wins his first hardcourt slam. Thank goodness Murray is out. I want to watch his match against Verdasco.

Also, LOST is back. The thing’s getting even twistier. I can’t believe it’s ending in two seasons.

Surprise hit of last week? Dark Avengers #1 is better than I thought.

Intelligence resumes tomorrow. So does work.

Nationalism and Citizenship in the Age of Obama

Barack Obama’s speech made me feel heavy — not in the sense of being burdened, but in the knowledge that the time for taking the easy way out is over. This is a new era of responsibility. This is the age when we, as a global community, redefine what citizenship means.

I am currently teaching nationalism in my social studies classes. However, I’ve always found this topic somewhat problematic.

First, my students are generally apathetic about their own country. They don’t read the papers, they don’t engage the political process, and they largely view politicians and public servants through a one dimensional lens that depicts them as corrupt, inept and undeserving of their stature.

Second, nationalism seems so passe. These same students live and breathe the Internet. It is no longer proper to say that they are exposed to other more progressive ways of life abroad; the fact is that this global awareness is very much part of their own world view. Local events are increasingly being compared to foreign ones, showing them that there is just too many ways to do things better — so why be loyal to our ways that don’t work?

That then leads to the inevitable question: If we know what’s wrong, why don’t we fix it? And at this juncture I often break into a discussion about our political history and the state of political patronage in our country. But this is futile. It will never be enough. The question remains — why don’t we fix it?

I realize that this question is the heart of the problem. I’ve gotten to know my students enough to say that generally, they are not apathetic. They do care a big deal. But what we often translate as apathy is actually powerlessness, the feeling that they have no role to play in the process or that any attempt to do so is an exercise in futility. Hence, they rather remain in those spheres which they can affect — such as their careers or private lives — or leave for other countries where their work will be better rewarded.

Watching Obama, we in the Philippines and the rest of the world often ask, “Where is our Obama?” But let us turn that question on its head, “If Barack Obama were born and raised in the Philippines, would he be the same Barack Obama?”

There is a profound truth in his claim that his story is only possible in the United States of America. Born the son of a man from Kenya and a woman from Kansas, Barack grew not anchored on race, land, or tradition. Yet by force of will and energy of talent, he took all he learned as a community organizer, a practicing lawyer, and a father, into the Illionois senate, then to Capitol Hill, and ultimately to the White House. He did so running against all the odds, and won with neither the exclusive patronage of an elite few or the benefits of an established political name (more often, his name was a liability). His call for change was heard far and wide, and his movement grew on the backs of ordinary citizens who gave their time, energy and money for a campaign that wasn’t about him but about all of them.

This may be a powerful American story. However, there is no reason for it to be a solely American story. If we concede that this will never happen for us, then our memories are short. Philippine history is not short of stories where individuals rose up to declare that enough is enough, and that we deserve better days ahead. This is the spirit of 1888, when a trinity of Filipino intellectuals residing in the land of their colonizer began demanding fairness and accountability. This is the legacy of 1898, when a revolution resulted in our independence and our first chance to chart our own course. And this is the reminder of 1986, when we reaffirmed that the power of democracy lies in our people and that no claim to freedom can be justified if we are not responsible in its use.

We just haven’t been fortunate enough to have leaders over the past decade to inspire us to go beyond our lesser selves. The paragons of truth and accountability were instead its foremost usurpers, and too many times have we run the risk of destroying democracy in order to save it. But that is a false choice. For democracy can only be saved if it is used, and this exercise goes beyond simply voting during election day.

The true demands of democracy is a call to citizenship. It is responding to the challenges we face as a people by being of service to others; by being willing to find meaning in something greater than ourselves. Admittedly, this is not easy. A lot of Filipinos are still unable to respond to the demands of their own survival, much less to the survival of others. There is still a prevailing sense of powerlessness among those who have the potential to make a difference. And the political establishment remains insulated from those public servants who would be selfless, altruistic, and transformative in their service.

There is no doubt that we need a leader who can lead us towards our better selves. But we cannot afford to wait either. For there are many among us who hear the call of service and respond to it each day. That in spite of the weaknesses of government, we are able to call upon and rely on our own strengths. The story of Barack Obama may force us to look into our society differently, but what truly makes a difference is what we see when we look into ourselves. Because of Barack, a new generation of Americans — regardless of race and creed — will see nothing but unlimited possibilities in who they can be if only the study hard enough, work well enough, and hope strong enough. Though we may live far from America, we share in the same aspirations. Our paths may be different but our destiny is shared.

It is acknowledging this responsibility that I go to work each day and contextualize nationalism for our current generation of Filipino youth. I challenge them to think of it not in terms of blind allegiance to the flag, but of an honest assessment of what needs to be done and how they could possibly help out. Not all of them may be ready to answer this yet, but if in asking I lead them to think about their country, then I count it as a simple success. For this teacher it is a start, but there is still so much work left to be done.

The Case for Reading

When I first began building my library, the resounding question here at home is what do I need all these books for. I will let this article echo everything I have to say — From Books, President-elect Obama Found His Voice.

Bridging the Blogging/Journalism Divide

The relationship between blogging and journalism has been written about extensively and I am certain that the vigorous debates in the Philippine blogosphere will go on for at least two more years.

The battlelines are interesting, with both sides accusing each other of either arrogance or decadence — journalists casting bloggers aside as undisciplined and indulgent, and bloggers shunning journalists as incompetent and biased. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

But mostly it is a David and Goliath story, though it is getting increasingly difficult to tell them apart. At times I see it as a battle of tactics very much like in the Philippine-American War at the dawn of the 20th century — one was established, powerful and bulky while the other relied largely on stealth, cunning and guerilla tactics.

At the opposite end of all these is the notion that the two media are different beasts, that they are complementary, and that there really is too much ado about nothing. I tend to agree; however, I realize that this position can mislead us from understanding the true relationship between the two media.

Coming from a social science perspective, I see their relationship in developmental terms. That blogging is a new technology doesn’t mean they have nothing to learn from journalism. It’s quite the opposite. Blogging — both as technology and activity — is heading towards a convergence where its users, the blogosphere if you will, eventually develop their own decorum, ethics and standards as bloggers. Just like all other systems, they will be governed by rules too.

The only difference is that there is no central authority, and the loci of power are as diffused as there are bloggers and interests and fields of expertise. This is characteristic of the postmodern world where the nature of power is not to challenge authority, but to assert ourselves as an authority in our own right. But to do so will require that we are learned, educated, wise and credible — hence, in an activity where we write about the truth, we can’t afford to not turn to those who have made writing about the truth their trade for the past two centuries. In a postmodern world where the blogger is paramount, the journalist is indispensible.

All of these is but a preface, and in some ways a response, to one of the most brilliant columns I’ve read in quite a while. I was struck by the writer’s sincerity and fairness in describing his own experiences as a journalist and blogger. His conflict is a reflection of postmodern power — as a journalist he subscribed to certain rules but as a blogger he made his own. His own resolution hints at the way forward for blogging and journalism at large.

Thus I highly recommend “Do Blogging and Journalism Mix?” by Carlos H. Conde.

Is it too late to look back at 2008?

I seem to have charged full steam into 2009 and with good reason. I am so busy out of the gate with Sophomore Saturday with my Batch (running two Saturdays each in January and February), and the Freedom Festival with AKSIS (running the entirety of February). Not to mention two field trips and a batch party to organize in March! And yes, I still teach — I actually got pulled into an exciting integrated project with the sciences so I now work as a consultant too.

Is there no rest for the weary? Nights like these are the closest I can get. Last night was pretty good too — I got up to speed with season seven of 24 (my first season actually) and didn’t realize how much I missed — and needed! — these marathons. I can’t wait for LOST…

But tonight, I am feeling rather retrospect. When I was in high school, my best friend and I used to mark the New Year by looking back at the old one, warts and all. It was unimaginably called “The Year in Review” and though it died when he left for the States, the psychological need to take stock and reconcile past with present was never lost. Come to think of it, this exercise has made history very personal to me.

Though I haven’t written here yet about 2008, I have had taken stock. It was a year I rather consider in its entirety than think of in terms of isolated events. It was a year when I was ready to move out of my comfort zone yet was drawn back in because of forces beyond me. In the process of reconciling where I wanted to be with where I actually was, I pushed against old boundaries and discovered aspects of myself I’ve never seen before — or at least, not in the intensity I see now.

Taking on the role of Batch Adviser is probably the crux of all these changes and discoveries. The lessons I learned in working with parents and representing students informed the way I now handle AKSIS and my SS2 classes.

Among those I learned are the ideas of fairness, clarity, accountability, and responsibility. Ideas and notions I’ve affirmed in me include the importance of having vision, building consensus, and projecting confidence in others. I discovered that I could be a ruthless pragmatist — while that has unleashed a whole new level of efficiency from me, I realize that I can come on too strong especially in a culture where conflicts are massaged and egos are soothed. I don’t do that but I may have to — from a political, Machiavellian point of view.

My lessons are far from over. I am continuing to learn more about myself each day, and for this alone I am optimistic about 2009.

I was also defined by external circumstances in 2008. At one point, I was flat broke. Bad decisions viciously ate into my savings and so I had to curb my spending habits as I rebuilt my savings from the ground up. Thankfully, that led me to become more practical in all things and while teaching still won’t make me rich, I’m better now.

The latter part of the year also saw a shift in our household. Technically, I am the only wage owner now. While I am reassured that there is no pressure to be the breadwinner (yet), what are parents if not experts in reverse psychology? Of course they don’t mean it that way, but a part of me will always be the dutiful son. He just happens to clash with the dedicated teacher at times. I realize that choosing between my dreams and others’ hopes for me is a false choice. One can have it both ways, and finding exactly how is a major theme this 2009.

Indeed, it is never to late to look back. As Faulkner says, “The past isn’t dead. It isn’t even past.”

Realizing where we’ve been allows us to chart the course of where we want to be — even if it isn’t clear, the bottomline is that we’re always moving forward. A life unplaced in history is not worth living; we all have the power to write our own story.

This fundamental insight into history is what keeps my passion for it burning. This view allows me to connect it to larger ideas such as citizenship and empowerment which influence my work. This is why I have to write this down, not so much for you but for me — that I will always remember as I run full steam ahead.

Freedom of Speech is Not Absolute

The College Editor’s Guild of the Philippines decried the suspension of four Quezon City Science High School students for their work on the blog, scientiaetvirtus.multiply.com.

The bloggers published a series of attacks on their principal, summarizing their moves as a lack of respect for someone who shows no respect. The blog’s content is abhorrent to any rational observer fully aware that these writers are minors — it is one thing to call for the head of an administrator, but it is another to call for her death.

Thus, the school administration moved to suspend four students whose names they did not disclose. They also shut down the two school papers, The Electron and Banyuhay. No surprise then that the CEGP condemn, “It is disturbing to learn that high school students, in their very young age, are being subjected to this kind of campus repression, their right to freedom of speech and expression undermined.”

Not so fast. I have several comments.

I cannot completely condemn what the QCSH administrators did for I do not know the extent of the four students’ involvement with the blog. Neither are we privy to the relationship of the blog with the school papers. Hence, it is impossible — at least based on what I’ve been reading in the media — to pass judgment. I hope the CEGP know more than I do, otherwise releasing such a statement would be irresponsible of them.

Nonetheless, I do not discredit the opposition to the QCSH administration either. Perhaps, all allegations in the blog are true. Their ruling may or may not be overkill. Either way, I will suspend judgment.

However, I am sure of several things.

That regardless of the veracity of the students’ claims, some punitive action is in order even if their principal is guilty. These students are minors. As a school, the QCSH is responsible for them and their actions. Exposing truth through journalism is one thing (and their blog is hardly journalism), but abjectly defaming another person is another. The school cannot tolerate such actions for doing so will ultimately reflect on them as educators. That doesn’t bode well for the parents, the alumni, their future students, and all those who have a stake in the school doing well.

I rather we form students who can constructively engage the truth, rather than resorting to wanton barbarism to get things done.

I am also certain, that if all the allegations against their principal are true, then justice must be served. Unfortunately, the blog does not provide a useful account of everything she has supposedly done wrong. Most of what they have written is juvenile ridicule with no clear line of protest nor solid plan of action. I see traces of a potential position paper, but emphasis on potential. I also wonder — what is happening on the faculty side? Reports have been eerily silent of how the rest of the QCHS reacts to all these, not that I expect the media, or the school admin for that matter, to disclose these details.

Hence, with all things being equal, let’s suppose that everything on the blog is true. There is a case to be made for the termination of the principal, but without a long, thorough administrative investigation which will ultimately decide her fate. There is also a case to be made for the students’ expulsion, or at the least, non-graduation provided that they positively identify the authors of the blog and these children are thoroughly investigated into as well.

Perhaps, there would be no discussion of these students’ suspension if the principal is subjected to administrative review. That would be fair and symmetrical, but without any signs (in the media, at least) of such review, then to some degree it’s possibly unfair and asymmetric. That explains the ire of some, but I rather we be sober and rational considering how little we really know. For if there is one lesson to be learned in all these, it is that freedom of speech is not absolute. There is such a thing as responsibility too.